https://what-if.xkcd.com/119/

i checked their post history and they reference being drunk while commenting previously, so i can only assume they went on one hell of a bender and fixated on dishwashers while struggling with some sort of trauma..

all this makes me think of is XKCD's "what if you used a laser to vaporize the rain around you?"

Not really, no. This is the same kind of silver-bullet thinking as self-driving cars, it may feel cool but in reality the best way to improve things are boring and have been known for centuries if not millennia.
Some things absolutely benefit from being underground, like railways in dense urban areas, but for most things it's just a ton of effort for not much benefit and introducing a bunch of problems (flooding is only going to become more common in the future).

What we should be doing is returning to everything being designed for the specific local environment, stop building everything identically all over the world.
Look at traditional construction and you'll find tons of small features that together make a HUGE difference, a prime example is how hot places had walled backyard gardens with a fountain in the middle, which basically turns the garden into a swamp cooler.

Putting big roads underground is what norway does, once you see it done it becomes very obvious that it should be standard (plus it helps prevent large roads from being built at all, which is even better).

one can tell the difference by the strength and weight, spider silk is strong as fuck and doesn't really float in the air, whereas dust strings have 0 resistence and will float around on the slightest air current.

"why should we do XYZ?"
"It keeps your bones on the inside :DDD"

i'm worley

you can get curly hair by doing chemotherapy (after a period of having no hair, of course)

it's frankly baffling to me that people don't just throw in a one-sentence explanation of why kids should do things, how tf are they supposed to learn?

Something i've come to realize is that an absolutely horrifying amount of my """autistic""" traits were just from not having had the opportunity to learn things, like when i was a kid i literally didn't understand that i was supposed to speak up if i'm in pain, i just sort of assumed that adults knew and didn't care.
Just in the past 5-10 years my life has been hugely improved by seeking out knowledge on my own, to the point that i now find informal social stuff so easy that other people are impressed.

It's why i'm an ardent supporter of the idea that most (or at least many) disabilities are almost entirely a problem with society, not the individual. And the depressing thing is that a lot of the adjustments to be made are really not that significant at all.

i assume it's actually vital in places like the US, where roads aren't designed so much as they grow like a fungus and thus you can quite literally have kilometers of traffic standing completely still.

i'm not sure why "social cues" and "authority" would have much to do with each other, it's not like anarchists are socially inept, in fact being socially adept is kinda a core part of functional anarchy.

I dislike arbitrary things as well, but thanks to the magic of understanding how to be social i can just talk to people about it and explain why i think arbitraryness sucks ass, and they then treat me nicely and feel bad about my struggles since i'm so easy to deal with.
And it's not like i'm some 10 charisma bard, simply being chill and not actively unpleasant gets you 80% of the way. Even if you never make eye contact you'll still be seen as pretty normal if you speak normally and follow basic conversational etiquette.